I started out reading this and wondering why anyone would oppose a screening registry for lung cancer.
Now I know. This was a well crafted article that seemed to make the issues crystal clear. Thanks..

Earl W. Ferguson, MD

04/29/14

This is just another example of government, academic and other bureaucracies pushing for "innovations"
that make our healthcare far more complex and expensive than it should be. When are we going to learn
than more programs and requirements levied on front-line healthcare providers is a problem? We should
focus on simplification, standardization and coordination of high-value, cost-effective care solutions
while minimizing administrative decisions and reporting, rather than continuing to increase the
complexities that healthcare providers are asked to deal with..

KAC RN

04/29/14

I am disinclined to give CMS any more control than they already have,
but I'm not sure the arguments proffered are reasonable. The number
of screenings would be 1,333,333% greater than the TAVR group. The
fees would be spread over a much larger group, so the actual fee per
participant would be less AND as mentioned in the article, the
registry would be Cloud-based, which would reduce the cost even
further, so that $25,000 number is hardly accurate. I do think a
registry would keep more people honest, with fewer screenings done on
low risk individuals..

This survey is a poll of those who choose to participate and are, therefore, not valid statistical samples, but rather a snapshot of what your colleagues are thinking.

MedPageToday is a trusted and reliable source for clinical and policy coverage that directly affects the lives and practices of health care professionals.

Physicians and other healthcare professionals may also receive Continuing Medical Education (CME) and Continuing Education (CE) credits at no cost for participating in MedPage Today-hosted educational activities.